All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Christian Marangi <ansuelsmth@gmail.com>
To: Miquel Raynal <miquel.raynal@bootlin.com>
Cc: "Richard Weinberger" <richard@nod.at>,
	"Vignesh Raghavendra" <vigneshr@ti.com>,
	"Srinivas Kandagatla" <srinivas.kandagatla@linaro.org>,
	"Rafał Miłecki" <rafal@milecki.pl>,
	"Martin Blumenstingl" <martin.blumenstingl@googlemail.com>,
	"Claudiu Beznea" <claudiu.beznea@tuxon.dev>,
	"AngeloGioacchino Del Regno"
	<angelogioacchino.delregno@collabora.com>,
	linux-mtd@lists.infradead.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
	stable@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] mtd: limit OTP NVMEM Cell parse to non Nand devices
Date: Thu, 21 Mar 2024 11:34:16 +0100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <65fc0d2b.050a0220.102ac.24f6@mx.google.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20240321113256.7e66ac0f@xps-13>

On Thu, Mar 21, 2024 at 11:32:56AM +0100, Miquel Raynal wrote:
> Hi Christian,
> 
> ansuelsmth@gmail.com wrote on Thu, 21 Mar 2024 10:55:13 +0100:
> 
> > MTD OTP logic is very fragile and can be problematic with some specific
> > kind of devices.
> > 
> > NVMEM across the years had various iteration on how Cells could be
> > declared in DT and MTD OTP probably was left behind and
> > add_legacy_fixed_of_cells was enabled without thinking of the consequences.
> > 
> > That option enables NVMEM to scan the provided of_node and treat each
> > child as a NVMEM Cell, this was to support legacy NVMEM implementation
> > and don't cause regression.
> > 
> > This is problematic if we have devices like Nand where the OTP is
> > triggered by setting a special mode in the flash. In this context real
> > partitions declared in the Nand node are registered as OTP Cells and
> > this cause probe fail with -EINVAL error.
> > 
> > This was never notice due to the fact that till now, no Nand supported
> > the OTP feature. With commit e87161321a40 ("mtd: rawnand: macronix: OTP
> > access for MX30LFxG18AC") this changed and coincidentally this Nand is
> > used on an FritzBox 7530 supported on OpenWrt.
> > 
> > Alternative and more robust way to declare OTP Cells are already
> > prossible by using the fixed-layout node or by declaring a child node
> > with the compatible set to "otp-user" or "otp-factory".
> > 
> > To fix this and limit any regression with other MTD that makes use of
> > declaring OTP as direct child of the dev node, disable
> > add_legacy_fixed_of_cells if we have a node called nand since it's the
> > standard property name to identify Nand devices attached to a Nand
> > Controller.
> 
> You forgot to update the commit log :-)
>

Ugh... sorry. Ok to resend or I need to wait 24h similar to the rules on
net-next?

-- 
	Ansuel

______________________________________________________
Linux MTD discussion mailing list
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-mtd/

WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Christian Marangi <ansuelsmth@gmail.com>
To: Miquel Raynal <miquel.raynal@bootlin.com>
Cc: "Richard Weinberger" <richard@nod.at>,
	"Vignesh Raghavendra" <vigneshr@ti.com>,
	"Srinivas Kandagatla" <srinivas.kandagatla@linaro.org>,
	"Rafał Miłecki" <rafal@milecki.pl>,
	"Martin Blumenstingl" <martin.blumenstingl@googlemail.com>,
	"Claudiu Beznea" <claudiu.beznea@tuxon.dev>,
	"AngeloGioacchino Del Regno"
	<angelogioacchino.delregno@collabora.com>,
	linux-mtd@lists.infradead.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
	stable@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] mtd: limit OTP NVMEM Cell parse to non Nand devices
Date: Thu, 21 Mar 2024 11:34:16 +0100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <65fc0d2b.050a0220.102ac.24f6@mx.google.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20240321113256.7e66ac0f@xps-13>

On Thu, Mar 21, 2024 at 11:32:56AM +0100, Miquel Raynal wrote:
> Hi Christian,
> 
> ansuelsmth@gmail.com wrote on Thu, 21 Mar 2024 10:55:13 +0100:
> 
> > MTD OTP logic is very fragile and can be problematic with some specific
> > kind of devices.
> > 
> > NVMEM across the years had various iteration on how Cells could be
> > declared in DT and MTD OTP probably was left behind and
> > add_legacy_fixed_of_cells was enabled without thinking of the consequences.
> > 
> > That option enables NVMEM to scan the provided of_node and treat each
> > child as a NVMEM Cell, this was to support legacy NVMEM implementation
> > and don't cause regression.
> > 
> > This is problematic if we have devices like Nand where the OTP is
> > triggered by setting a special mode in the flash. In this context real
> > partitions declared in the Nand node are registered as OTP Cells and
> > this cause probe fail with -EINVAL error.
> > 
> > This was never notice due to the fact that till now, no Nand supported
> > the OTP feature. With commit e87161321a40 ("mtd: rawnand: macronix: OTP
> > access for MX30LFxG18AC") this changed and coincidentally this Nand is
> > used on an FritzBox 7530 supported on OpenWrt.
> > 
> > Alternative and more robust way to declare OTP Cells are already
> > prossible by using the fixed-layout node or by declaring a child node
> > with the compatible set to "otp-user" or "otp-factory".
> > 
> > To fix this and limit any regression with other MTD that makes use of
> > declaring OTP as direct child of the dev node, disable
> > add_legacy_fixed_of_cells if we have a node called nand since it's the
> > standard property name to identify Nand devices attached to a Nand
> > Controller.
> 
> You forgot to update the commit log :-)
>

Ugh... sorry. Ok to resend or I need to wait 24h similar to the rules on
net-next?

-- 
	Ansuel

  reply	other threads:[~2024-03-21 10:34 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 10+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2024-03-21  9:55 [PATCH v2] mtd: limit OTP NVMEM Cell parse to non Nand devices Christian Marangi
2024-03-21  9:55 ` Christian Marangi
2024-03-21 10:32 ` Miquel Raynal
2024-03-21 10:32   ` Miquel Raynal
2024-03-21 10:34   ` Christian Marangi [this message]
2024-03-21 10:34     ` Christian Marangi
2024-03-21 13:19     ` Miquel Raynal
2024-03-21 13:19       ` Miquel Raynal
2024-03-25 10:19       ` Christian Marangi
2024-03-25 10:19         ` Christian Marangi

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=65fc0d2b.050a0220.102ac.24f6@mx.google.com \
    --to=ansuelsmth@gmail.com \
    --cc=angelogioacchino.delregno@collabora.com \
    --cc=claudiu.beznea@tuxon.dev \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-mtd@lists.infradead.org \
    --cc=martin.blumenstingl@googlemail.com \
    --cc=miquel.raynal@bootlin.com \
    --cc=rafal@milecki.pl \
    --cc=richard@nod.at \
    --cc=srinivas.kandagatla@linaro.org \
    --cc=stable@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=vigneshr@ti.com \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.